Event and Time
Event Description
- Ms. Backus (the applicant) initiated proceedings for financial adjustment under section 90SM of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), claiming a statutory de facto relationship from 2007 to 2020.
- Mr. Abano (the respondent) disputed the existence of the de facto relationship and challenged the Court's jurisdiction to address the financial adjustment claims.
- Subsequent to trial directions, the respondent filed an application to vacate the upcoming hearing and sought a stay due to serious criminal charges against him related to the applicant's daughters.
Application and Claims
- Applicant's Claims:
- Asserts the existence of a statutory de facto relationship and seeks financial adjustment. - Filed an Initiating Application on December 17, 2020.
- Respondent's Claims:
- Contests the existence of the de facto relationship and the jurisdiction of the Court. - Filed a Response on March 8, 2021 and subsequently an Application in a Proceeding on January 5, 2022 to vacate the hearing.
Judicial Decisions
- The judge recused himself from the case due to prior appearance as the respondent's counsel in related proceedings, citing the apprehended bias test.
- The case would be reassigned to Justice Henderson for further hearing.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- The applicant argues for recognition of a statutory relationship that entitles her to a financial adjustment.
- The respondent denies the existence of the de facto relationship and asserts that the court lacks jurisdiction.
- There is also a procedural matter concerning the judge's prior involvement as counsel, raising concerns over impartiality.
- Legal Basis:
- The test for apprehended bias from and ; the necessity for judges to maintain impartiality.